Samsara Shmamsara: Compassion or Commerce? = Cake or Death?

Pictures from Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds (1963)

Releasing animals has been a traditonal practice of Buddhists. This action is probably inspired by the vows to save all beings from suffering, which incidentally also helps the person gain some merits.

When we were still living in Vietnam, my mother, like thousands of other Buddhists, would buy birds, fish or turtles sold at pagodas and set them free. Even at my young age, I was able to point out to her the futility of her gesture, since the people who sold her the animals would immediately catch them back for resale, but of course, what mother would ever listen to her young child, especially in religious matters.

An article in the Washington Post looks at the tradition from a public health point of view:

«.. the tradition, in which devotees seek blessings for this life and the next, could now prove to be a curse. Animal health experts warn that the practice of capturing wild birds, holding them in confined quarters and then turning them over to human hands could spread avian flu among birds, across species and on to people... So far, avian influenza has not been diagnosed in any of the birds released at the temples of Buddhist Asia, from Thailand to Taiwan. But that is only because so few have been tested, according to Martin Gilbert, a field veterinarian with the U.S.-based Wildlife Conservation Society. The virus, which has killed people in at least seven countries, including Cambodia, and infected birds on three continents, has been discovered in some of the same species that are sold in front of Buddhist shrines.

Though the ritual of releasing birds is practiced in several Asian countries with Buddhist populations, the tradition in Cambodia is intertwined not only with religion but national identity. The king frees doves, pigeons and other wild fowl about four times a month -- in especially generous numbers to mark royal birthdays -- and this has complicated efforts to curb the practice.»

But even without the health risks, a tradition which may be valid during the Buddha time doesn't make much sense nowadays. The Buddhist Channel site explains:

The action of releasing birds has by itself sprouted an industry for it. For a religion that talks about compassion, it does seems strange that our actions can bring about an industry that catches birds in the wild, hold them in small and cramped cages (usually with many other birds) and then allowing people to buy and releasing them back to the wild again, just so that we "humans" may feel that we have done a good deed.
One of the methods used by these vendors to catch the birds is to set up a net across the woods. As the bird flies through they get entangled inside it. Many of these nets are not meant for a harmless capture, unlike those used for research. The entangled birds often gets injured or exhaust themselves as they struggle desperately to get free. By the time the bird catcher comes and collects the birds, they are either exhausted or starving. Many either die in the net or while being transported to the market.

Those that live are then stuffed into a cage which hosts many other birds as well, often in unhygienic conditions. We don't even know if the vendors feed the birds at all. Due to the cramped conditions, some of the birds fight among themselves in the cage. Some suffocate or bleed to death because of the fights. By the time anyone comes along to buy these birds for release they would have already suffered for a few days. So, for every bird released, probably five more would have died.

Such acts of cruelty are not just consigned to birds, but also to other species such as fishes, terrapins and tortoises. In order to catch the animals, some vendors would have their habitats destroyed or poisoned, some animals are ripped apart from their flock or have their entire flock killed. Like a lot of marine fish (which are not bred in farms), many of them are caught by locals using dynamites or cyanide poisoning. In the process, their habitats are ruined, which in turn condemns those not caught to suffer and live in a poisoned environment. Many of the shop owners who buy fish and other animals care very little about their habitats or the methods used to catch them. Their main concern, obviously is the bottom line.

The moral argument here is not about being for or against the releasing of animals, but about the economics behind the action, that is, the payment of ransom for their release. Whenever we pay to buy something, we encourage the vendors to continue their trade.

This dilemma is constantly played out with animal conservationalists in areas with a lot of wildlife like Africa. They constantly have to struggle with their personal emotions to refrain from buying a young primate (e.g. gorilla, chimpanzee or gibbon) from the market place because once they do that, it will encourage the sellers to catch more of those animals to sell them to the conservationalists. And to catch these young primates usually means that the parents have to be killed in order to pry them off from their arms. So in effect, by buying an animal off the streets, people are not saving an animal but are rather causing the brutal death of two or more animals.

What about those whose livelihood depends on such sales? Well, life is certainly not easy for anyone caught in such a moral dilemma. It is also hard for a wise and compassionate Buddhist to weight the proper merits of each action. This is something for all concerned to ponder in depth, for there is no easy solution.